Patch notes discussion thread 2022

[Northstar98]

Ooh, I just noticed there's a new ship - a Resolve-class AOR (MV Tilde in the mission editor - which I'm not sure is a real ship, only one I can find is the Asterix which).

Edited December 17, 2022 by Northstar98

[Rudel_chw]

Has the latest DCS update added a bit of multicore support?   

Somehow, my PC now seems to load a lot more than the just 2 cores of previous versions:

 

 

Has anyone else noticed this?

 

[Dragon1-1]

6 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Ooh, I just noticed there's a new ship - a Resolve-class AOR (MV Tilde in the mission editor - which I'm not sure is a real ship, only one I can find is the Asterix which).

This might be pun necessitated by the actual ship's name being based on an IP ED doesn't have rights to. It's not really "Resolve-class", the project was called Resolve, but the only ship in the class is the Asterix.

[Northstar98]

3 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

This might be pun necessitated by the actual ship's name being based on an IP ED doesn't have rights to. It's not really "Resolve-class", the project was called Resolve, but the only ship in the class is the Asterix.

I've only done some minor research, but aren't they looking at building more?

The other thing is that it doesn't quite look like the Asterix - the overall shape is there, but at the front there's this raised area.

Also, this seems to be a new South Atlantic assets vessel, as that's where the model file is located inside of CoreMods

Edited December 17, 2022 by Northstar98

[Gunfreak]

Can confirm the new  .50 cal ammo works.

 

 

[Silver_Dragon]

dynamic holes?

[DD_fruitbat]

2 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

Can confirm the new  .50 cal ammo works.

 

 

Yep, its pretty deadly now!

 

[Gunfreak]

14 minutes ago, DD_fruitbat said:

Yep, its pretty deadly now!

 

Gonna test the P51 soon. 2 less guns,  but easier plane to get close to the enemy with.

[Silver_Dragon]

Not bad checking all WW2 improvements:

Quote

 

DCS P-51D

New Historically accurate Belt Options
New .50 Cal round: CARTRIDGE, incendiary, .50 cal, M1
New .50 Cal round: CARTRIDGE, tracer, .50 cal, M1
Damage Model: Armor Glass Value adjusted
Damage Model: Headrest & Seat Back Value adjusted
Damage Model: Instrument Panel Value adjusted
Damage Model: Firewall Value adjusted

DCS P-47D

New Historically accurate Belt Options
New .50 Cal round: CARTRIDGE, incendiary, .50 cal, M1
New .50 Cal round: CARTRIDGE, tracer, .50 cal, M1
Damage Model: Rear Armor Value adjusted
Damage Model: Instrument Panel Value adjusted

DCS Fw 190A-8

Damage Model: Armor Glass Value adjusted
Damage Model: Headrest Value adjusted
Damage Model: Seat Armor Value adjusted
AB250 / AB500 disperse pattern incorrect for high-altitude (Submunition Fusing still WIP)

DCS Fw 190D-9

Damage Model: Armor Glass Value adjusted
Damage Model: Headrest Value adjusted
Damage Model: Seat Armor Value adjusted

DCS Bf 109K-4

The new cooling system model is integrated
Damage Model: Seat Armor Value adjusted
Damage Model: Armor Glass Value adjusted

DCS Spitfire LF Mk. IX

The new cooling system model is integrated
Damage Model: Headrest Armor Value adjusted
Damage Model: Body/bottom Armor Value adjusted
Damage Model: Bullet Proof windscreen Value adjusted

 

Missing improvement on Spitfire and Mosquito belts and Axis Aircrafts. Someone has check the new cooling system?

[Gunfreak]

9 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Not bad checking all WW2 improvements:

Missing improvement on Spitfire and Mosquito belts and Axis Aircrafts. Someone has check the new cooling system?

What's wrong with the Spit and Mossie belts. They have specific belt types.

The Germans still have the generic "combat mix " that the Americans had until now.

[DD_fruitbat]

I'm really hoping the Hispano's on the Spitfire will be looked at in the near future, pretty anaemic imo. 

[Silver_Dragon]

13 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:

What's wrong with the Spit and Mossie belts. They have specific belt types.

The Germans still have the generic "combat mix " that the Americans had until now.

1 API : 1APIT : 3 AP -> 0.303

https://forum.cartridgecollectors.org/t/303-british-spitfire-belt/23668

 

[Gunfreak]

34 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

1 API : 1APIT : 3 AP -> 0.303

https://forum.cartridgecollectors.org/t/303-british-spitfire-belt/23668

 

And?

[sirrah]

Great job on making the Apache pilot bodies so lifelike ED 

(They are not just static models with the hands and feet moving around when the player makes inputs, but you also occasionally see some minor leg movements)

 

Also great to see the CPG head position finally in the center of the seat! (although the default head position still needs some attention imho. It's too close to the TADS, which is very noticeable when you try to boresight align)

[scommander2]

On 12/17/2022 at 9:57 AM, Rudel_chw said:

Has the latest DCS update added a bit of multicore support? 

I see no sub process was forked from DCS.exe....

[Dangerzone]

I notice that the Open Beta has gone from 2.8.0.x to 2.8.1.x without a stable release being released for 2.8.0.

Just wondering if 2.8.0 was never considered stable enough for a release, or if this has been skipped for any other reason?

(I definitely don't want SR updated if the last build of 2.8.0 isn't considered stable enough, just surprised that instead of stabilising 2.8.0 first that 2.8.1 is now being worked on and was wondering if 2.8.0 will be skipped entirely for SR)?

[MadKreator]

2.8 still has its share of bugs to work out with loading textures, shadows, bit of a performance hit in some cases etc. There is some nice features like the lighting updates on PG and SA. Aside from some module updates. You aren’t missing anything really game changing at this stage. Still being worked through. Its not terrible by any means but I’d say its not quite where people would expect it to be. 

[Dangerzone]

1 hour ago, MadKreator said:

2.8 still has its share of bugs to work out with loading textures, shadows, bit of a performance hit in some cases etc. There is some nice features like the lighting updates on PG and SA. Aside from some module updates. You aren’t missing anything really game changing at this stage. Still being worked through. Its not terrible by any means but I’d say its not quite where people would expect it to be. 

That's what I thought. I just wasn't expecting progress to 2.8.1 before resolving those issues. I'm guessing then that maybe there were functions only in 2.8.1 that were required in order to release the KA50-III and there was the push for Christmas so the decision was made to advance to 2.8.1 BETA releases and skip 2.8.0 as an official release completely. 

[MadKreator]

10 minutes ago, Dangerzone said:

That's what I thought. I just wasn't expecting progress to 2.8.1 before resolving those issues. I'm guessing then that maybe there were functions only in 2.8.1 that were required in order to release the KA50-III and there was the push for Christmas so the decision was made to advance to 2.8.1 BETA releases and skip 2.8.0 as an official release completely. 

yes that could very much be true with BS3. It was odd to jump to 2.8.1 before 2.8.0 went stable.

[Gunfreak]

13 hours ago, MadKreator said:

2.8 still has its share of bugs to work out with loading textures, shadows, bit of a performance hit in some cases etc. There is some nice features like the lighting updates on PG and SA. Aside from some module updates. You aren’t missing anything really game changing at this stage. Still being worked through. Its not terrible by any means but I’d say its not quite where people would expect it to be. 

Since open beta 2.8 we've gotten new weather system.

New BFM for jets.

And just a few days ago, biggest update to ww2 planes in ages, with new historically correct ammo for the .50 cals. More correct armor for all the warbirds (except mossie) fixed cooling system for Sptifire and 109k.

So I'd say you are missing quite a lot by not using open beta. Particularly if you fly warbirds a lot. 

[BIGNEWY]

14 hours ago, Dangerzone said:

I notice that the Open Beta has gone from 2.8.0.x to 2.8.1.x without a stable release being released for 2.8.0.

Just wondering if 2.8.0 was never considered stable enough for a release, or if this has been skipped for any other reason?

(I definitely don't want SR updated if the last build of 2.8.0 isn't considered stable enough, just surprised that instead of stabilising 2.8.0 first that 2.8.1 is now being worked on and was wondering if 2.8.0 will be skipped entirely for SR)?

Once we are happy open beta does not have any show stopping issues we will be looking to update the stable version. 

I have no ETA for you all currently 

thank you

 

[Baldrick33]

12 hours ago, MadKreator said:

yes that could very much be true with BS3. It was odd to jump to 2.8.1 before 2.8.0 went stable.

It isn't that unusual.

For example there were no Stable versions of 2.7.4 2.7.8 2.7.12 2.7.15 (current version is 2.7.18) 

Stable should only ever be updated when considered ready.

[MadKreator]

33 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:

Since open beta 2.8 we've gotten new weather system.

New BFM for jets.

And just a few days ago, biggest update to ww2 planes in ages, with new historically correct ammo for the .50 cals. More correct armor for all the warbirds (except mossie) fixed cooling system for Sptifire and 109k.

So I'd say you are missing quite a lot by not using open beta. Particularly if you fly warbirds a lot. 

I am on open beta, always have been The changes are good! Just saying it still needs a bit of ironing out still before its stable ready. I personally don’t care about any bugs, as long as it’s not unplayable. Nature of software development. I mean, I literally hated night missions and avoided them at all costs. Now’s I’ve flown more since 2.8 than I have in 5 years solely due to the lighting upgrades. Game is playing great for me!

[MadKreator]

1 hour ago, Baldrick33 said:

It isn't that unusual.

For example there were no Stable versions of 2.7.4 2.7.8 2.7.12 2.7.15 (current version is 2.7.18) 

Stable should only ever be updated when considered ready.

Hmm interesting, guess I never paid much attention to the stable release versions

[Dangerzone]

9 hours ago, Baldrick33 said:

It isn't that unusual.

For example there were no Stable versions of 2.7.4 2.7.8 2.7.12 2.7.15 (current version is 2.7.18) 

Stable should only ever be updated when considered ready.

Aaah - so not out of the ordinary. Thanks for that.

I'm happy to stay on stable until the next is released. I deal with diagnosing bugs all day as a living for too many decades - I appreciate the opportunity to experience a few less of them with my recreational time, even if it means I have a few more weeks to wait before I get the additional features too. I'm quite happy for the rest to be beta testers and find the problems (and solutions) before I get there. (In fact I appreciate it).